Packages fail with 4.6. Search for the tracker bug, the info is all there._________________backend.cpp:92:2: warning: #warning TODO - this error message is about as useful as a cooling unit in the arctic

The issue with grub seems to be hard to reproduce, at least I don't have any issue compiling it (4.6.3)._________________backend.cpp:92:2: warning: #warning TODO - this error message is about as useful as a cooling unit in the arctic

Even Debian testing has moved to 4.7, but it's been AGES since Gentoo is stuck at 4.5. I didn't find many issues in bugzilla... what could be the problem?

With all due respect, debian do not need to worry about +15k packages being able to compile with an infinite number of different configurations, architectures, configure options, CFLAGS, etc. They just need to be able to compile themselves to produce a binary that will be common for all the debian users._________________Gentoo Handbook | My website

The issue with grub seems to be hard to reproduce, at least I don't have any issue compiling it (4.6.3).

It's actually not that Grub compiled against GCC 4.6.3 fails to compile, the problem is MUCH weirder. It problem is, it compiles fine, it installs fine, but when you reboot after you do grub-install, it fails to start.

Well, at least I thought I did all that and it worked for me. But not for some._________________backend.cpp:92:2: warning: #warning TODO - this error message is about as useful as a cooling unit in the arctic

The issue with grub seems to be hard to reproduce, at least I don't have any issue compiling it (4.6.3).

It's actually not that Grub compiled against GCC 4.6.3 fails to compile, the problem is MUCH weirder. It problem is, it compiles fine, it installs fine, but when you reboot after you do grub-install, it fails to start.

I just switched to Lilo after many many years with Grub (and getting lost with Grub2). Lilo can boot two kernels, current and failsafe, need no more. And has no mysterious problems with GCC._________________Please learn how to denote units correctly!

Political Correctness is all about replacing imaginary injustice with real injustice.

Syslinux (specifically Extlinux) is another option. I've been using it on a 64-bit only system (no IA-32 emulation, no multilib -- meaning no GRUB) with no problems (but I don't dual boot or do anything fancy).

With all due respect, debian do not need to worry about +15k packages being able to compile with an infinite number of different configurations, architectures, configure options, CFLAGS, etc. They just need to be able to compile themselves to produce a binary that will be common for all the debian users.

What? Since when is Gentoo a polished distribution instead of just collection of information allowing simpler building of everything from source?

With all due respect, debian do not need to worry about +15k packages being able to compile with an infinite number of different configurations, architectures, configure options, CFLAGS, etc. They just need to be able to compile themselves to produce a binary that will be common for all the debian users.

What? Since when is Gentoo a polished distribution instead of just collection of information allowing simpler building of everything from source?

It's a lot more than the latter, but it's not a polished binary distro: it's as polished as a source-distro can be imo.

The point still stands: gentoo has to be a lot more careful about pushing out a new major release of gcc, especially if it results in visible user-breakage of common system tools. The whole point is that due to the variability of configurations, settings which are frozen across a binary distro, it's not as simple as getting a set of tools working in just one configuration. And no, it's not sufficient to just forget about the subset of users who run into problems: rather the problem should be tracked down and fixed so everyone benefits, now and into the future.

There is not really a stable alternative yet: The first grub2 not hanging forever on my machine was 2.00_beta0, and then the next betas were all broken in various ways. 2.00_beta5 seems again usable, but with such a releas policy (working, non-working, still-not-working, broken-in-another-way, working again) this is nothing one can use for a production system.

With all due respect, debian do not need to worry about +15k packages being able to compile with an infinite number of different configurations, architectures, configure options, CFLAGS, etc. They just need to be able to compile themselves to produce a binary that will be common for all the debian users.

What? Since when is Gentoo a polished distribution instead of just collection of information allowing simpler building of everything from source?

It's a lot more than the latter, but it's not a polished binary distro: it's as polished as a source-distro can be imo.

The point still stands: gentoo has to be a lot more careful about pushing out a new major release of gcc, especially if it results in visible user-breakage of common system tools. The whole point is that due to the variability of configurations, settings which are frozen across a binary distro, it's not as simple as getting a set of tools working in just one configuration. And no, it's not sufficient to just forget about the subset of users who run into problems: rather the problem should be tracked down and fixed so everyone benefits, now and into the future.

I am not going into that debate. If someone is not able to see what the difference is then s/he clearly lacks the background to argue with me about that. Not that I am ubber or something, it's just evident...

The main point here is that Debian or Ubuntu users do not need to care about their gcc being able to compile their whole system. They only need to care about gcc being able to compile their own personal projects, which they develop, and which they can fix themselves if some issue arises._________________Gentoo Handbook | My website

I am sure that grub is not what's holding gcc 4.7 from being stabilized. But, if you want things to happen faster, you can always join and help with grub2, gcc or whatever else. Every hand is welcome. _________________Gentoo Handbook | My website

As noted in an earlier post with the bugzilla link, gcc 7 is getting stabilized. The 'broken packages' list is being whittled down by upstream maintainers relatively quickly. I have gcc 7 installed and the vast majority of my packages build fine. Linux kernel compiles and runs fine with it...and gcc 7 compiles noticeably faster on many packages. So start using gcc 7 and sending bug reports to get it done faster.

As noted in an earlier post with the bugzilla link, gcc 7 is getting stabilized. The 'broken packages' list is being whittled down by upstream maintainers relatively quickly. I have gcc 7 installed and the vast majority of my packages build fine. Linux kernel compiles and runs fine with it...and gcc 7 compiles noticeably faster on many packages. So start using gcc 7 and sending bug reports to get it done faster.

Except, you know, you can't build firefox or chromium with it (I'm assuming you really mean gcc 4.7). Considering that 4.6 is still hard masked and 4.7 isn't even in portage yet, this is probably a really bad idea unless you want to break things…

No, that was your first point, which I left alone. Your second point was that Gentoo is not really a distro but "just [a] collection of information allowing simpler building of everything from source" which is untrue of Gentoo, but might be true of LFS. Gentoo gives you the tools to maintain an installation, or many installations, customised to your specs and built from source.

With respect to grub, I haven't looked at the code, so I don't know what changes when you compile with gcc-4.6 vs 4.5; irrespective, gcc is generating code that no longer works. In any event, afaict it's a simple fix (add -fno-reorder-functions) which has been incorporated, although another culprit appears to be a patch to allow placing /boot above the 1TB limit, a patch which most other distros like fedora and ubuntu don't use. See bug 360513. I think the best option would be just to stop using that distro-specific patch, especially since it doesn't even appear to work (comment 81).

Except, you know, you can't build firefox or chromium with it (I'm assuming you really mean gcc 4.7). Considering that 4.6 is still hard masked and 4.7 isn't even in portage yet, this is probably a really bad idea unless you want to break things…

Sure, several big package don't compile yet, but as I said, most things do. I know Chromium is already getting attention. 4.7 is the official gcc release now.

Skip 4.6, it's a dead end...we're talking 4.7.

And yes, it's not in portage yet, but will be very soon...for know, I'm just pulling from the toolchain overlay. And I'm not using it exclusively...I switch back and forth betwee 4.5.3 and 4.7...it's easy to do with gcc-config.

Just look at the respective tracker bugs 4.6 vs 4.7 and expect much, much more to come for the latter as it gets more testing (see gcc-4.5 and 4.4 trackers for clues). So stabilizing 4.6 is really more realistic unless you are prepared to wait even longer for 4.7, and it helps progression anyway._________________backend.cpp:92:2: warning: #warning TODO - this error message is about as useful as a cooling unit in the arctic